Summary Background Microbiological confirmation of childhood tuberculosis is rare because of the difficulty of collection of specimens, low sensitivity of smear microscopy, and poor access to culture. We aimed to establish summary estimates for sensitivity and specificity of of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay compared with microscopy in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in children. Methods We searched for studies published up to Jan 6, 2015, that used Xpert in any setting in children with and without HIV infection. We systematically reviewed studies that compared the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) with microscopy for detection of pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in children younger than 16 years against two reference standards—culture results and culture-negative children who were started on anti-tuberculosis therapy. We did meta-analyses using a bivariate random-effects model. Findings We identified 15 studies including 4768 respiratory specimens in 3640 children investigated for pulmonary tuberculosis. Culture tests were positive for tuberculosis in 12% (420 of 3640) of all children assessed and Xpert was positive in 11% (406 of 3640). Compared with culture, the pooled sensitivities and specificities of Xpert for tuberculosis detection were 62% (95% credible interval 51–73) and 98% (97–99), respectively, with use of expectorated or induced sputum samples and 66% (51–81) and 98% (96–99), respectively, with use of samples from gastric lavage. Xpert sensitivity was 36–44% higher than was sensitivity for microscopy. Xpert sensitivity in culture-negative children started on antituberculosis therapy was 2% (1–3) for expectorated or induced sputum. Xpert’s pooled sensitivity and specificity to detect rifampicin resistance was 86% (95% credible interval 53–98) and 98% (94–100), respectively. Interpretation Compared with microscopy, Xpert offers better sensitivity for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in children and its scale-up will improve access to tuberculosis diagnostics for children. Although Xpert helps to provide rapid confirmation of disease, its sensitivity remains suboptimum compared with culture tests. A negative Xpert result does not rule out tuberculosis. Good clinical acumen is still needed to decide when to start antituberculosis therapy and continued research for better diagnostics is crucial. Funding WHO, Global TB Program of Texas Children’s Hospital.

Consensus case definitions for childhood tuberculosis have been proposed by an international expert panel, aiming to standardize the reporting of cases in research focusing on the diagnosis of intrathoracic tuberculosis in children. These definitions are intended for tuberculosis diagnostic evaluation studies of symptomatic children with clinical suspicion of intrathoracic tuberculosis, and were not intended to predefine inclusion criteria into such studies. Feedback from researchers suggested that further clarification was required and that these case definitions could be further improved. Particular concerns were the perceived complexity and overlap of some case definitions, as well as the potential exclusion of children with acute onset of symptoms or less severe disease. The updated case definitions proposed here incorporate a number of key changes that aim to reduce complexity and improve research performance, while maintaining the original focus on symptomatic children suspected of having intrathoracic tuberculosis. The changes proposed should enhance harmonized classification for intrathoracic tuberculosis disease in children across studies, resulting in greater comparability and the much-needed ability to pool study results.

Available data suggest that TST and IGRAs have similar accuracy for the detection of TB infection or the diagnosis of disease in children. Heterogeneous methodology limited the comparability of studies and the interpretation of results. A rigorous, standardized approach to evaluate TB diagnostic tests in children is needed.